• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

评估社会情感学习项目的实施质量:混合方法研究。

Evaluating the Implementation Quality of a Social and Emotional Learning Program: A Mixed Methods Approach.

机构信息

World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Health Promotion, National University of Ireland Galway, University Road, H91TK33 Galway, Ireland.

出版信息

Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 May 7;17(9):3249. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17093249.

DOI:10.3390/ijerph17093249
PMID:32392698
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7246810/
Abstract

School-based social and emotional learning (SEL) programs have been shown to be effective in producing positive outcomes for adolescents. However, variability in implementation quality can have a negative impact on these program effects. The aim of this current study is to examine the variability in implementation quality for schools implementing the MindOut program and to identify factors that were likely to contribute to this variability. Employing a mixed methods approach, quantitative and qualitative implementation data were collected from teachers (n = 16) and students (n = 280) who participated in the MindOut program. Quantitative indicators were used to score schools' implementation quality across four dimensions (dosage, adherence/fidelity, quality of delivery and participant responsiveness), and these were averaged to determine overall level of implementation (high/low). Qualitative data identified factors that contributed to implementation quality, and factors were then analyzed in accordance with the schools' implementation level grouping. Findings indicated that variability in implementation quality existed both between and within schools. A total of eight schools were assigned as high implementers and another eight as low implementers. Influencing factors were categorized into five themes: (i) program factors, (ii) participant factors, (iii) teacher factors, (iv) school contextual factors, and (v) organizational capacity factors. Several differences between high and low implementers were found in relation to these influencing factors. The findings contribute to the evidence on implementation quality in schools by advancing knowledge on measuring implementation quality across multiple dimensions and informants successfully. These findings can also inform practitioners of the main influencing factors in schools so that strategies can be developed to optimize implementation quality in the future.

摘要

学校层面的社会情感学习(SEL)项目已被证明对青少年产生积极影响是有效的。然而,实施质量的变异性可能对这些项目效果产生负面影响。本研究旨在考察实施 MindOut 项目的学校实施质量的变异性,并确定可能导致这种变异性的因素。本研究采用混合方法,从参与 MindOut 项目的教师(n=16)和学生(n=280)中收集了定量和定性的实施数据。定量指标用于对学校在四个维度(剂量、遵从/保真度、交付质量和参与者反应性)的实施质量进行评分,并对这些指标进行平均以确定总体实施水平(高/低)。定性数据确定了对实施质量有贡献的因素,然后根据学校的实施水平分组对因素进行分析。研究结果表明,实施质量存在学校之间和学校内部的变异性。共有八所学校被评为高执行者,另有八所学校被评为低执行者。影响因素分为五个主题:(i)项目因素,(ii)参与者因素,(iii)教师因素,(iv)学校背景因素,和(v)组织能力因素。在这些影响因素方面,高执行者和低执行者之间存在一些差异。研究结果通过成功地在多个维度和报告者中衡量实施质量,为学校实施质量方面的证据做出了贡献。这些发现还可以为学校的从业者提供主要影响因素的信息,以便未来制定优化实施质量的策略。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4c04/7246810/4d5e515b1818/ijerph-17-03249-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4c04/7246810/4d5e515b1818/ijerph-17-03249-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4c04/7246810/4d5e515b1818/ijerph-17-03249-g001.jpg

相似文献

1
Evaluating the Implementation Quality of a Social and Emotional Learning Program: A Mixed Methods Approach.评估社会情感学习项目的实施质量:混合方法研究。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 May 7;17(9):3249. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17093249.
2
A Cluster Randomized-Controlled Trial of the MindOut Social and Emotional Learning Program for Disadvantaged Post-Primary School Students.一项针对弱势中学后学生的“MindOut 社会与情绪学习计划”的整群随机对照试验
J Youth Adolesc. 2019 Jul;48(7):1245-1263. doi: 10.1007/s10964-019-00987-3. Epub 2019 Apr 19.
3
Supporting systemic social and emotional learning with a schoolwide implementation model.通过全校实施模式支持系统性社会情感学习。
Eval Program Plann. 2019 Apr;73:53-61. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2018.11.005. Epub 2018 Nov 10.
4
Examining teacher approaches to implementation of a classwide SEL program.审视教师实施班级SEL 项目的方法。
Sch Psychol. 2022 Jul;37(4):285-297. doi: 10.1037/spq0000502. Epub 2022 Apr 28.
5
The Effects of Implementation Quality of a School-Based Social and Emotional Well-Being Program on Students' Outcomes.一项基于学校的社会和情感幸福计划的实施质量对学生成果的影响。
Eur J Investig Health Psychol Educ. 2020 May 22;10(2):595-614. doi: 10.3390/ejihpe10020044.
6
The Role of Participant Responsiveness on a Socio-Emotional Learning Program.参与者反应性在社会情感学习项目中的作用。
Span J Psychol. 2017 Jan 19;20:E2. doi: 10.1017/sjp.2016.104.
7
Teachers' Perceptions of School Organizational Climate as Predictors of Dosage and Quality of Implementation of a Social-Emotional and Character Development Program.教师对学校组织氛围的认知作为社会情感与品格发展项目实施剂量和质量的预测因素
Prev Sci. 2015 Nov;16(8):1086-95. doi: 10.1007/s11121-014-0534-7.
8
What Constitutes High-Quality Implementation of SEL Programs? A Latent Class Analysis of Second Step® Implementation.什么构成了社会情感学习(SEL)项目的高质量实施?对“第二步”®实施情况的潜在类别分析
Prev Sci. 2016 Nov;17(8):981-991. doi: 10.1007/s11121-016-0670-3.
9
The role of teachers' commitment to implement in delivering evidence-based social-emotional learning programs.教师对实施基于证据的社会情感学习计划的承诺的作用。
J Sch Psychol. 2021 Oct;88:85-100. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2021.08.003. Epub 2021 Sep 21.
10
Social Emotional Learning and the promotion of equal personal relationships among adolescents in Panama: a study protocol.社会情感学习与促进巴拿马青少年平等人际关系的研究方案
Health Promot Int. 2021 Aug 24;36(3):741-752. doi: 10.1093/heapro/daaa114.

引用本文的文献

1
Identifying high-risk groups for self-harm in adolescents using the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC): a cross-cohort comparison latent class analysis study.利用阿冯父母与儿童纵向研究(ALSPAC)识别青少年自残的高危群体:一项跨队列比较潜在类别分析研究。
Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2025 Apr 5. doi: 10.1007/s00787-025-02702-z.
2
A protocol of a randomized control trial to test the feasibility and efficacy of the EMPOWER social-emotional learning curriculum for youth aged 11-14 years in after-school settings.一项随机对照试验的方案,旨在测试“赋能”社会情感学习课程在课后环境中对11至14岁青少年的可行性和有效性。
PLoS One. 2025 Mar 17;20(3):e0319398. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0319398. eCollection 2025.
3

本文引用的文献

1
The sustainability of public health interventions in schools: a systematic review.学校公共卫生干预措施的可持续性:系统评价。
Implement Sci. 2020 Jan 6;15(1):4. doi: 10.1186/s13012-019-0961-8.
2
A Cluster Randomized-Controlled Trial of the MindOut Social and Emotional Learning Program for Disadvantaged Post-Primary School Students.一项针对弱势中学后学生的“MindOut 社会与情绪学习计划”的整群随机对照试验
J Youth Adolesc. 2019 Jul;48(7):1245-1263. doi: 10.1007/s10964-019-00987-3. Epub 2019 Apr 19.
3
Promoting Positive Youth Development Through School-Based Social and Emotional Learning Interventions: A Meta-Analysis of Follow-Up Effects.
Mindfulness's moderating role applied on online SEL education.
正念在在线社会情感学习教育中的调节作用。
Front Psychol. 2024 Nov 19;15:1499357. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1499357. eCollection 2024.
4
A scoping review of the implementation and cultural adaptation of school-based mental health promotion and prevention interventions in low-and middle-income countries.对低收入和中等收入国家基于学校的心理健康促进与预防干预措施的实施及文化适应的范围综述。
Glob Ment Health (Camb). 2024 Apr 12;11:e55. doi: 10.1017/gmh.2024.48. eCollection 2024.
5
Effectiveness of Health Promotion Interventions in Primary Schools-A Mixed Methods Literature Review.小学健康促进干预措施的有效性——一项混合方法文献综述
Healthcare (Basel). 2023 Jun 21;11(13):1817. doi: 10.3390/healthcare11131817.
6
Positive Attitude Upper Middle School social and emotional learning program: influences of implementation quality on program outcome.积极态度初中社会情感学习项目:实施质量对项目成果的影响。
Front Psychol. 2023 May 17;14:1172517. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1172517. eCollection 2023.
7
Monitoring system of implementation of the Promoting Mental Health at Schools (PROMEHS) program.学校促进心理健康(PROMEHS)项目实施监测系统
Front Psychol. 2022 Oct 26;13:1043001. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1043001. eCollection 2022.
8
Children's Perspectives on Using Serious Games as a Complement to Promoting Their Social-Emotional Skills.儿童视角下的严肃游戏:作为提升社会情感技能的补充。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Aug 4;19(15):9613. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19159613.
9
The Effects of Implementation Quality of a School-Based Social and Emotional Well-Being Program on Students' Outcomes.一项基于学校的社会和情感幸福计划的实施质量对学生成果的影响。
Eur J Investig Health Psychol Educ. 2020 May 22;10(2):595-614. doi: 10.3390/ejihpe10020044.
10
Innovations in Social and Emotional Learning Research and Practice: Building from Evidence and Applying Behavioral Insights to the Design of a Social and Emotional Learning Intervention in Northeast Nigeria.社会情感学习研究与实践的创新:从证据中汲取灵感,并将行为洞察力应用于尼日利亚东北部社会情感学习干预措施的设计。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jul 11;18(14):7397. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18147397.
通过基于学校的社会和情绪学习干预促进青少年积极发展:随访效果的元分析。
Child Dev. 2017 Jul;88(4):1156-1171. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12864.
4
Quality Matters: Implementation Moderates Student Outcomes in the PATHS Curriculum.质量至关重要:实施情况调节 PATH 课程中学生的成果。
Prev Sci. 2018 Feb;19(2):197-208. doi: 10.1007/s11121-017-0802-4.
5
High impact of implementation on school-based smoking prevention: the X:IT study-a cluster-randomized smoking prevention trial.实施对学校吸烟预防的高度影响:X:IT研究——一项整群随机吸烟预防试验
Implement Sci. 2016 Sep 17;11(1):125. doi: 10.1186/s13012-016-0490-7.
6
Maximizing the Implementation Quality of Evidence-Based Preventive Interventions in Schools: A Conceptual Framework.最大化学校中基于证据的预防性干预措施的实施质量:一个概念框架。
Adv Sch Ment Health Promot. 2008 Jul;1(3):6-28. doi: 10.1080/1754730x.2008.9715730.
7
Implemented or not implemented? Process evaluation of the school-based obesity prevention program DOiT and associations with program effectiveness.实施了还是未实施?基于学校的肥胖预防项目DOiT的过程评估及其与项目效果的关联
Health Educ Res. 2016 Apr;31(2):220-33. doi: 10.1093/her/cyw007.
8
Implementing health promotion programmes in schools: a realist systematic review of research and experience in the United Kingdom.在学校实施健康促进项目:对英国研究与经验的现实主义系统评价
Implement Sci. 2015 Oct 28;10:149. doi: 10.1186/s13012-015-0338-6.
9
Treatment integrity in school-wide programs: a review of the literature (1993-2012).全校性项目中的治疗完整性:文献综述(1993 - 2012年)
J Prim Prev. 2015 Oct;36(5):335-49. doi: 10.1007/s10935-015-0400-9.
10
Process evaluation of a sport-for-health intervention to prevent smoking amongst primary school children: SmokeFree Sports.一项预防小学生吸烟的健康运动干预措施(无烟运动)的过程评估。
BMC Public Health. 2015 Apr 10;15:347. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-1645-1.